Aces High Bulletin Board

General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Hristo on December 23, 2002, 05:49:45 AM

Title: Panther 75 mm vs Tiger 88mm
Post by: Hristo on December 23, 2002, 05:49:45 AM: Now, I have only basic knowledge on tanks and have found this interesting. In one of recent discussions someone mentioned Panther 75mm being better than Tiger's 88mm.

Why ?
Title: Panther 75 mm vs Tiger 88mm
Post by: Karnak on December 23, 2002, 06:16:25 AM: The Panther's 75mm gun has better armor penetration than the Tiger's 88mm gun.

Why?

I don't know off hand, but I'd guess that it has higher muzzle velocity and maybe a better shape for the ammo.
Title: guns
Post by: Tony Williams on December 23, 2002, 06:45:39 AM: Yes, the Panther's 75mm L/70 gun had a significantly higher muzzle velocity than the Tiger I's 88mm L/56, and better armour penetration as a result (although it was possibly less useful in general, as it fired a much less effective HE shell).

However, the Tiger II's 88mm L/71 was much better than either. It was also used on the Elefant and Jagdpanther.

In the attached photo from my website, the ammo is as follows (from left to right):

3,7 cm Pak/KwK; 5 cm L/42 (PzGr.40); 5 cm L/60 (HE); 7,5 cm L/24 (early PzIV); 7,5 cm L/43 and L/48 (later Pz.IV); 7,5 cm L/70; 8,8 cm L/56; 8,8 cm L/71. The picture gives a good idea of the relative power of the guns:

http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/tankger.jpg

Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website (http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk) and discussion
forum (http://forums.delphiforums.com/autogun/messages/)
Title: Panther 75 mm vs Tiger 88mm
Post by: brady on December 23, 2002, 06:59:14 AM: Some Jagdtigers also fitted the 88mm L/71 , as well as the Nashorn.
Title: Panther 75 mm vs Tiger 88mm
Post by: brady on December 23, 2002, 07:02:27 AM: The Panthr was a much better Tank than the Tiger I, more deadly, better Cross country preformance, good armor, about the only thing like Tony said that it did not best the Tiger at was the HE effect of the MA .
Title: Panther 75 mm vs Tiger 88mm
Post by: Fishu on December 23, 2002, 02:17:28 PM: Tiger had better side armour ;)

Tiger wasn't so slow though.. it was faster offroad than PzIII (woo.. 18kph vs 20kph ;)) and 36kph on the road.
Not much slower, although Panther was slower than any other medium or heavy panzer.
Title: Panther 75 mm vs Tiger 88mm
Post by: hyena426 on December 23, 2002, 02:42:39 PM: The Panther's only problem was its tracks,,too exposed and easy to take out
Title: Panther 75 mm vs Tiger 88mm
Post by: Jester on December 23, 2002, 02:53:08 PM: What made the Panther better than the Tiger I was it's slopped armor & speed not it's gun. That made the protection even better without increasing armor thickness or weight.

Even though the Panthers 75mm L/70 gun (also used on the Panzerjager IV Tank Destroyer) had a higher muzzle velocity, I find it hard to believe the statements that it was better than the 88mm L/56.

From what I have always read the 88 was the "KING" of tank weapons during WW2 and would only take one or two shots at the most to take out ANY Allied tank from min to max ranges.
Title: Panther 75 mm vs Tiger 88mm
Post by: GRUNHERZ on December 23, 2002, 02:58:38 PM: Nobody said it was better than the 88/L71 of Tiger II. Everyone said, and correctly so, that it's better than the 88/L56 of Tiger I.
Title: Panther 75 mm vs Tiger 88mm
Post by: Staga on December 23, 2002, 05:29:29 PM: Yep....

Penetration to RHA 0-degree angle

Ammunition Range 500 Range 1000 Range 2000
75L70 APCR 234mm 199mm 145mm
88L56 APCR 200mm 179mm 143mm

75L70 APCBC 168mm 149mm 116mm
88L56 APCBC 151mm 138mm 126mm

88L71 is different case... with APCR it still penetrates 177mm and with APCBC 153mm from 3000m.

Source "World War II Ballistics: Armor and Gunnery".
Title: Panther 75 mm vs Tiger 88mm
Post by: Ecliptik on December 23, 2002, 06:55:40 PM: I think a lot of people generally don't realize that impact energy is far more dependant on velocity than projectile mass (generally related to the shell diameter).

So, just an aside:

E=(1/2)*mass*velocity^2

Doubling muzzle velocity will increase energy by a factor of four, while doubling mass will only increase energy by a factor of two.

This is why, for example, 5.56mm assault rifles are far more lethal than a 9mm pistol. The pistol fires a beefier round but the rifle fires its round with a much higher velocity.

The aerodynamic shape of the round determines how much speed the round will lose with distance.

The type of round will also affect what sort of muzzle velocity you can get.

A 75mm Sabot AP round will achieve a higher muzzle velocity than a normal 75mm AP round. While the old-style AP shell is fitted to the barrel diameter, the sabot shell is actually smaller than the 75mm diameter of the barrel, but it is held in place by a "discarding sabot", a sort of boot made of lighter materials, which fits the barrel and falls off after the round is fired. Thus the same explosive charged can be used as for the standard AP round, but since the sabot round has less mass, it will be accelerated to a higher velocity.

http://www.arl.hpc.mil/SciVis/images/avco131.gif

Also, rounds fired from rifled barrels which stabalize the shell by causing it to spin about its length will have a lower muzzle velocity than fin-stabalized rounds fired from smoothbore barrels, because some of the energy from the explosive cartridge is used up in the rotational acceleration of the round, whereas in the latter case, all of the energy accelerates the round straight forward.
Title: Panther 75 mm vs Tiger 88mm
Post by: Imp on December 23, 2002, 07:09:26 PM: If the german used HEAT than the 88mm would be better but they used AP and APBC type round so the higher velocity made the 75mm more effective end of story.

75mm velocity was about 1100 meters per second (thats about 3600 feet per second for you folks that are still stuck in the stone age :D )
Title: Panther 75 mm vs Tiger 88mm
Post by: Jester on December 23, 2002, 08:30:55 PM: My bad, I ment the 88mm L/56 of the Tiger I in the above post. Have corrected it.

Staga's figures would seem to put me in the wrong. Straga. What are these figures from - out of curiosty.

Will have to go read up on my German AFV's again.
Title: Panther 75 mm vs Tiger 88mm
Post by: Staga on December 23, 2002, 09:57:49 PM: Source was up there, "World War II Ballistics: Armor and Gunnery"

Pretty boring looking book with just couple pics but it's loaded with charts, formulas and info about different calibers, ammunitions, armours, penetration figures... everything you wanna know.

More: http://www.wargamer.com/reviews/book_wwii_armor_and_gunnery.asp
http://www.angelraybooks.com/books/hw/0017hw.htm
Title: Panther 75 mm vs Tiger 88mm
Post by: Jester on December 23, 2002, 10:42:30 PM: Tks Staga, will check it out. !
Title: Panther 75 mm vs Tiger 88mm
Post by: Pongo on December 24, 2002, 12:11:03 AM: Its better for the same reason that the 88 on a tiger is a better anti tank gun then the 25 pounderartillery piece(also 88 mm) Higher velocity from a longer barrel and a larger charge.
The 88 keeps its velocity a bit better because of the superior diameter to weight ratio of the round. Or so I read once..that 88-90 mm was the ideal balistic caliber for a full caliber round..(discarding sabot changing that of course)